|
Message-ID: <CABtNtWH4u4_wmj6Zpxj81Hon4HB88GrEPQJvJqWzTPjsimWhiQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 20:45:44 +0800 From: Kai Zhao <loverszhao@...il.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: auditing our use of FMT_* flags Hi Alexander, On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > Kai, > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 10:33:57AM +0800, Kai Zhao wrote: >> Hope the following patch can solve the two problems. >> >> https://github.com/magnumripper/JohnTheRipper/pull/1664/files > > This looks mostly OK to me. > > BTW, why do you call the error message buffer s_size? Why that name? > > I see there is an s_size in core tree, but it's used like this: > > static char *fmt_self_test_body(struct fmt_main *format, > void *binary_copy, void *salt_copy) > { > static char s_size[32]; > [...] > for (size = 0; size < PASSWORD_HASH_SIZES; size++) > if (format->methods.binary_hash[size] && > format->methods.get_hash[size](index) != > format->methods.binary_hash[size](binary)) { > sprintf(s_size, "get_hash[%d](%d)", size, index); > return s_size; > } > > and that's the only use of it. In your code, this choice of variable > name makes no sense to me. > Could I change the "s_size" to "err_buf" ? Thanks, Kai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.